We begin with PCMark 8, which should help establish some expectations of the real-world testing.
The Home test is designed to reflect typical productivity workloads, including Web browsing, writing, gaming, photo editing, and video chat.

The Athlon 5350 beats Intel's Celeron J1900 by about 10% in the CPU-oriented version of the benchmark. But when OpenCL acceleration is enabled, AMD's new APU leads by much more. This shouldn't come as a surprise, given the Athlon's super graphics component and its compute potential.

The Athlon establishes an advantage in the Dhrystone module. Both processors are much more evenly matched in the floating-point-oriented Whetstone metric.

The Athlon 5350 fares well in the GPU-accelerated version of Sandra's cryptography benchmark, where plenty of memory bandwidth and AES-NI support are particularly useful. The Radeon shaders are also quite helpful for hashing.

3DMark's Cloud Gate benchmark gives us a synthetic peek into GPU performance. The Athlon carves out a fairly small advantage in the physics sub-test. However, its graphics score almost doubles the Celeron, which in turn affects the overall outcome.

Futuremark's Peacekeeper Web browsing benchmark affords AMD another win, again in the 10-15% range.

Fair warning here: this synthetic benchmark was provided by AMD to demonstrate the company's new GPU-powered JPEG decoding acceleration, enabled in the Catalyst 14.8 beta 8 driver used for this review. Of course, we're most interested in how this feature works in the real-world.
- The AM1 Platform: Kabini Surfaces On The Desktop
- One Bay Trail-D And Two AM1 Motherboards
- Test Systems And Benchmarks
- Synthetic Benchmarks
- Media Encoding Benchmarks
- Productivity Benchmarks
- File Compression Benchmarks
- Game Benchmarks
- Power And Temperature
- AMD's AM1 Platform Is A Winner, But Who Is Playing The Game?
It's just convenience and cost efficiency, really, on the one hand, you've got 1 motherboard, CPU, tower, PSU, OS and IP adress for remote control and 8 HDDs and on the other, you've still got 8 HDDS, but 2 of everything else. Power consumption wouldn't make THAT much of a difference, since storage servers mostly idle, but the noise and size do take their toll.
It's just convenience and cost efficiency, really, on the one hand, you've got 1 motherboard, CPU, tower, PSU, OS and IP adress for remote control and 8 HDDs and on the other, you've still got 8 HDDS, but 2 of everything else. Power consumption wouldn't make THAT much of a difference, since storage servers mostly idle, but the noise and size do take their toll.
I think the 1920x1080 and 1600x900 graph for Dota 2 are the wrong way round? And it would be good to also have had a graph for its performance with dedicated GPU.
I think the problem is the PSU. Using 850W XFX is total overkill and even being certified as gold class, it has high efficiency at 20% load, which is 170 W. Therefore the PSU is used in non-efficient area and can simply add 15 - 20 W extra to the final power consumption.
Next time maybe borrow PicoPSU and some efficient brick.